OpenEuphoria

Re: Euphoria Interpreter design

• Posted by Lucius Hilley III <lhilley at CDC.NET> Feb 25, 1999
• 467 views

On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:35:28 +0100, Ralf Nieuwenhuijsen <nieuwen at XS4ALL.NL>
wrote:

>
>Btw, Robert, considering this, wouldnt it be able to routine_id () a
global or local variable and/or constant and have it work
>like a function (with zero arguments) ?
>
>Nevertheless, im not convinced. I still want mutally callable include
files. I dont mind a forced linear order *within* the
>include file. (local scope only thus).
>
>Ralf

I agree here.  I don't feel this is an issue of define-it-before-you-use-it.
I feel this is a scope issue that should have been cleared up long ago.
IE:
--   image.e    --
include graphics.e
--CODE

-- MyProgram --
include custom.e
include image.e

--image.e has access to custom.e global routines, variables and constants.
--ALSO
-- MyProgram has access to all of graphics.e global routines and variables.

I feel that image.e should not have access to custom.e globals
I also feel that I MyProgram should not have access to graphics.e globals.

This is clearly and issue of scope. I feel that access to globals of an
include file should only be available to the code that implicitly included
the file.

        Lucius L. Hilley